Re: More federal management of key components of the Internet needed

[Rick Irving <rirving () onecall net>]

 Hey, Sean, if it is against the law to yell FIRE in a crowded
movie theatre in America...

 Why isn't it against the law to (s)Yell "FUD" at Congress ?

  :\

Sean Donelan wrote:
> It's starting already.

  It started with the USA Patriot Act, the beginning paroxysms of
rigor mortis
of the American Constitutional Rights under a new regime, and the 
"virtual" death of the Bill of Rights....

  This is just a continuation of an ongoing trend. (IMHO)

  Remember, after 10 years of being declared "paranoid", and an
"Enemy of the State", Abbie Hoffman was -absolutely right-!
 (CoinTelPro)

  Did anyone notice that under the new laws, 

    -== Watergate is perfectly LEGAL  ? ==-

</rant- but, let that one sink in....really.>

  Yes, I know Susan... switching to on-topic. :P

> I don't understand how giving the US federal government management control
> of key components of the Internet will make it more secure.

  Neither do I. For example, I recently received a joint FBI/DOJ
letter...

(I believe if I leave out details, I am allowed to mention this
here...)

 It informed me that, 10 MONTHS AGO, a list was found that had an
-email domain-
of ours, as a -possibly- affected -server-. 
(There is no such actual server, it is only an e-mail domain.. )

  And, wanted me to see of there was any strange activity, somewhere
in a
4 MONTH time frame, that I could see....
 
  Oh, BTW, they had NO information on methodology, layer 3 protocol
affected,
ports, IP's.. and stated as such.  -=Nothing=-

(Not even a valid server name)

 And, ONLY, 10 MONTHS after the fact!
    
 Why, do you know in Internet Years, that would be.....
  urrr.....that would be... carry the zero's...square the root,
  hrmmm...
   I would be DEAD  ? :*

 And these are the people that are going to -=improve=- security ?

 How, by sentencing Perps to death by OLD AGE ?  :D

> What steps could
> the US federal government take which non-governmental organizations aren't
> or couldn't do?  Putting a root name server on a military base isn't
> really going to protect it from DDOS attacks.
>
> Should root servers be located in the "middle" of backbones, instead of stub
> networks?  Or do networks naturally "grow" towards root servers?
>
> http://www.idg.net/ic_958962_1793_1-1681.html
>   "More federal management of key components of the Internet
>   infrastructure is needed, Julian and Brady agreed. That could include
>   tax incentives or direct federal funding for private companies and
>   public organizations managing key DNS servers to secure their systems,
>   all of which are currently operated as a free service by companies,
>   government entities and non-profit organizations.
>
>   "This showcases a specific vulnerability that requires the government to
>   get involved," Julian said. "If you run a DNS server what is your
>   monetary incentive to secure it? There is none.

  Wrong, the monetary incentive is that -=your=- system remains
operational,
 and your network UP, and responding.... when others don't.

 What, no one in congress associates "uptime" with a "monetary
advantage" in business ?

 No WONDER they all bought from Enron.

 * S *

(Just kidding)

> This is the number one
> >   area of focus that the government should have."

  I think they should be focusing on terrorist activity, if you ask
me.

  * shrug *

.Richard.

-= FUD! it isn't a sales tool, it's a way of Managing a Nation. =-

 "God Bless America, and the American Constitution."

 I leave you with the Oath of Office of the American President:

     "I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will
     faithfully execute the Office of the
     President of the United States, and will to
     the best of my ability, preserve, protect and
     defend the -=constitution=- of the United
     States."

Ok. One last Quote, from U2:

  "A Politicians Promise on the Day of Election"